Assaf
Firstly lets place this in context - the code has never had a release
AFAIK. So anyone relying on this is relying on code with no legal
standing from Apache.
Secondly, if someone moves from an Apache codebase to a forked
codebase, then that should be a deliberate action with a real purpose.
Michael Wechner schrieb:
> Paul Fremantle wrote:
>
>> I agree with the general point about the legality of using the
>> org.apache namespace. However, I think there is a significant issue
>> here. People assume that org.apache code is from Apache.
>>
>
>
> agreed. Hence I would also suggest that wh
Paul Fremantle wrote:
Niall
Asking someone politely to rename the package is hardly throwing our
weight around.
very much agreed and I guess if one can show a migration path (as I have
suggested) which doesn't break too much, then I think nobody should mind
renaming the packages.
But w
Niall
Asking someone politely to rename the package is hardly throwing our
weight around.
Paul
On Jan 22, 2008 8:50 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 22, 2008 8:27 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree with the general point about the legality of using t
David E Jones wrote:
The idea of putting all business level stuff in the database is
interesting, but I'm still a skeptic. You can certainly build revision
control around it, but how do you get the same combination of off-line
and remote work along with team collaboration and group effort
sync
On Jan 22, 2008, at 12:50 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
What you can't do is to use the Apache brand for another project,
meaning to use the package names including apache if it's not an
Apache project.
I thought the whole point of the AL was that pepople could take code
away and do whatever the
On 1/22/08, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I agree with the general point about the legality of using the
> org.apache namespace. However, I think there is a significant issue
> here. People assume that org.apache code is from Apache. And the
> reasoning that its too much effort to r
On Jan 22, 2008 8:27 PM, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree with the general point about the legality of using the
> org.apache namespace. However, I think there is a significant issue
> here. People assume that org.apache code is from Apache. And the
> reasoning that its too much
Paul Fremantle wrote:
I agree with the general point about the legality of using the
org.apache namespace. However, I think there is a significant issue
here. People assume that org.apache code is from Apache.
agreed. Hence I would also suggest that when moving the code that the
package nam
I agree with the general point about the legality of using the
org.apache namespace. However, I think there is a significant issue
here. People assume that org.apache code is from Apache. And the
reasoning that its too much effort to rename is frankly wrong. Even
sed could do a decent job and proba
On Jan 22, 2008 6:23 PM, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think the terminology in the subject is wrong.
>
> You are not "moving a failed incubation project." That project is dead.
>
> What you can do is to use the code in another project, and assume all
> responsibility to verify tha
On Jan 22, 2008, at 8:41 AM, Ahmad Khalifa wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
Ahmad Khalifa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ultimately, what this would be good for, is to offer several
pre-built applications along the lines of CRM, ERP, Accounting, POS,
etc... just like some already available application
On 1/22/08, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think the terminology in the subject is wrong.
>
> You are not "moving a failed incubation project." That project is dead.
>
> What you can do is to use the code in another project, and assume all
> responsibility to verify that the licen
Thanks for all the answers, Craig and Martijn!
Antonio
2008/1/22, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Antonio,
>
> On Jan 22, 2008, at 3:39 AM, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
>
> > 2008/1/22, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>
> >> I think a software grant is in order then [1]. There does
On 1/22/08, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think the terminology in the subject is wrong.
>
> You are not "moving a failed incubation project." That project is dead.
>
> What you can do is to use the code in another project, and assume all
> responsibility to verify that the licen
Hi Antonio,
On Jan 22, 2008, at 3:39 AM, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
2008/1/22, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I think a software grant is in order then [1]. There does need to
be a
paper
trail where he grants the foundation the use of the code. That can
either
be
through a CLA or a
Hi folks,
IIRC, the AL says to not use the name of Apache for
advertising the product. It doesn't say anything
about package names. There is other code out there
that uses org.apache namespaces, to provide
compatibility with Commons Logging for example.
There is also non-Apache code in org.apache
I think the terminology in the subject is wrong.
You are not "moving a failed incubation project." That project is dead.
What you can do is to use the code in another project, and assume all
responsibility to verify that the license in the code is correct.
What you can't do is to use the Apa
Hi Antonio,
If the contributor signs a CLA and then herself commits the code to
the Apache repository, it's ok.
If the contributor signs a code grant and then attaches the code to a
JIRA, it's ok.
If the contributor signs a code grant and then emails the code to the
project, it's ok but
El mar, 22-01-2008 a las 11:51 +, sebb escribió:
> On 22/01/2008, J Aaron Farr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Just wondering whether Labs would be a suitable place to collaborate
> > > on scripts for cross-checking/reformatting the meta data? Also
I don't know anything about the legal side, but it would seem to me to
be quite unacceptable to publish new releases with org.apache.*
namespace. That namespace belongs to the ASF, and users will expect that
anything published under that namespace has the approval of the ASF.
So if development of
J Aaron Farr wrote:
Ahmad Khalifa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ultimately, what this would be good for, is to offer several
pre-built applications along the lines of CRM, ERP, Accounting, POS,
etc... just like some already available applications, but the extra
customization features would make it
I agree that a rename would be good advice. However, I didn't see anything in
the Apache license that would enforce you
to do it. Is it?
Of curse, you have to use the correct NOTICE files, and you couldn't name your
project Apache .
But is there really a trademark issue with package names?
Ahmad Khalifa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ultimately, what this would be good for, is to offer several
> pre-built applications along the lines of CRM, ERP, Accounting, POS,
> etc... just like some already available applications, but the extra
> customization features would make it much more ad
Antonio Petrelli wrote:
2008/1/22, Ahmad Khalifa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
The application is a framework for creating business applications.
Unlike some business application frameworks, this one does not generate
Java code or XML, instead it has a repository to store object
definitions, and the runt
agree that rename is required.
Carl.
Paul Fremantle wrote:
Hans
My understanding is that you do need to change the package names, but
I'd like to see who else chimes in here.
Any decent Java IDE will rename the packages and fix up the code
without too much hassle.
Paul
On 1/22/08, Hans Gran
2008/1/22, Ahmad Khalifa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> The application is a framework for creating business applications.
> Unlike some business application frameworks, this one does not generate
> Java code or XML, instead it has a repository to store object
> definitions, and the runtime interprets th
Hello,
I wanted to propose a new project idea. This is not a formal proposal,
this just an attempt to see if such a project has a place at the ASF,
and if anyone would be interested in participating.
Note, The project has a working codebase.
The application is a framework for creating business
On 22/01/2008, J Aaron Farr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Just wondering whether Labs would be a suitable place to collaborate
> > on scripts for cross-checking/reformatting the meta data? Also to
> > document the current meta data.
>
> Technically the incuba
2008/1/22, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I think a software grant is in order then [1]. There does need to be a
> paper
> trail where he grants the foundation the use of the code. That can either
> be
> through a CLA or a software grant.
One last question.
Does he need to sign the so
2008/1/22, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I think a software grant is in order then [1]. There does need to be a
> paper
> trail where he grants the foundation the use of the code. That can either
> be
> through a CLA or a software grant.
Thank a lot Martijn! I'd never found this sect
I think a software grant is in order then [1]. There does need to be a paper
trail where he grants the foundation the use of the code. That can either be
through a CLA or a software grant.
Martijn
[1] http://www.apache.org/licenses/
On 1/22/08, Antonio Petrelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hell
Hans
My understanding is that you do need to change the package names, but
I'd like to see who else chimes in here.
Any decent Java IDE will rename the packages and fix up the code
without too much hassle.
Paul
On 1/22/08, Hans Granqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I want to move a fail
Hello,
A fast question, to which I cannot find an answer in the site.
Does a code donor for an incubating project need to sign a CLA even if
he does not want to participate in the development?
In particular, I am writing about Dimensions proposal:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/DimensionsProposal
34 matches
Mail list logo
